Published on 2016- 2017

Right wing is there in any society. Artificial states are created in Europe after the Second World War that does not have any connection with their Christian roots or identity. European Union is curved out of 50 languages united in the name of liberal democracy and secularism. The influence of fascist elements still exists in European states. So the return of real nation states can happen anytime if strong and wise leadership come and use appropriate time. Europe experienced in 1920s to 1930s rise of ultra right under leadership of Hitler-Musolini-Franco. The ultra rightists rose again after end of cold war due to absence of real opposition against liberalism and globalization which threaten social foundations of ethnic people. Technological development led the people towards individualism and profit motivated unsustainable societies.
Revival of Russia through strong leadership, economic crisis, far right wing in UK leading to Brexit, emergence of right wing population across the Europe, continuous direct and indirect US intervention in European states, the decaying effects of  globalization experienced on eastern Europe motivated right wingers to do revolt against and modernity. Frequently orchestrated bloody rebellions and civil war in Arab nations created refugee crisis around all direction. Maidan protest conducted in Ukraine by liberal elites of USA and EU to overthrow the government in 2014 and destabilize the Balkan states to provoke Russia. Legal joining of Crimeans joined with mother state Russia from artificial Ukraine state. East Europe have cultural heritage and hence they expose the threats of liberal democracy, multiculturalism, international bankers, crooked policy cultivated for destabilizing Europe. Middle-East at the same time enduring hybrid wars constructed by liberal elites resulting for Europe refugee crisis, economic crisis and unemployment problems.
European national states forgot to build up their nations according to ethnicities and become weaker in social capital. European Union is a temporary build up under US globalists and their NATO army to counter the right wing parties of Europe, weaken the erstwhile Soviet countries and integration of Russian states. European people should think about their real enemy who weakened the Europe further through cultural attack. Enemies use the Jews against Europe in 1920s to 1945 and now using Muslim migrants among whom there are extremists against Europe. The elite class is creating false enemies and using them against each other for their own benefits. Elites planned the world map, demography for dividing and integrating the national states according to their needs. They create failed states or artificial states for enslaving the world population and looting world resources in unjust manner and ignoring the real problems under the cover of liberal democracy.
The right wingers use the chain of events efficiently and trying to construct an independent European states and dismantling artificial temporary European Union and questioning the need of NATO. European people fears about the migrants and refugees in the time of economic crisis and also afraid of ineffective puppet governments under US control. Muslim migrant threats are created by crooked atlanticists in north africa, middle east, central asia and urge them knowingly or unknowningly to turn against Europe. Muslim leadership or Muslim nations joined with liberal atlantic elites for their existence. Poor refugees are moving towards the politically stable countries for shelter and living. Elites were aiming the power using migrants as a tool. The nations of the migrants were already destabilized through orchestrated civil war. Power and security of Muslims Arab nations are in hands of world ruling elites. So Muslims are easy prey for globalist elites.
Skilled political leaders in times of great economic and social crisis motivate the people towards a change. Right wing government should extend cooperation towards Russia for protecting the traditions and also towards China for reducing challenging effects of unlimited liberalization. Far right parties have only the option of Russia and China after the dissolution of European Union and the end from Atlantic elites. Sincere leaders and intellectuals should unite for protecting their national identity and work towards sustainable development in Europe and conducting intellectual discussions for introducing new political theory suitable to current state of the West. Eurasian union or European Union is only possible when the political leaders could have permanent solutions for the global chaos. This is the time for responsible real world leaders to act to stabilize the failed states in Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa by implementing good policies rather than looting or uncontrolled exploitation. Empowerment of all nations and sustainable development must be goal of alternative right wingers.

 



New Delhi has sought in recent years to rebrand its “Look East” policy towards ASEAN as the muscular and invigorated “Act East” one which aims to most closely connect the subcontinent with the neighboring economic bloc. In a sense, this is India’s response to China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Roads, and the flagship project is the Trilateral Highway between itself, Myanmar, and Thailand. Upon future completion, it’s anticipated that this initiative will greatly facilitate commercial activity and real-sector trade between the three states, which in turn will enable the robust expansion of Indian influence deeper into the ASEAN mainland.

In parallel with this but much less promising due to the undeclared political obstacles which have emerged between its two largest players, there’s also the possibility for the BCIM Corridor between Bangladesh, China, India, and Myanmar to get up and running one of these days, which could theoretically lessen the rivalry between New Delhi and Beijing in their mutually adjacent neighbor of Myanmar. Pertaining to that crucially positioned country, India is also pursuing the much smaller-scale project of the Kaladan Corridor, a series of multimodal infrastructure initiatives connecting the northwestern Myanmarese coast with Northeastern India.

With time, India expects that the successful completion of all of these endeavors will allow it to eventually compete with China and provide a viable balancing alternative for ASEAN. Complementary to this, New Delhi hopes that it can cement its influence to the extent of reliably integrating part or all of this bloc into its leadership’s hegemonic conception of the “Indian Ocean Region”, which would thus expand India’s sphere of geopolitical influence along ancient civilizational lines.

The challenge for India, however, is that a large part of this strategy is inordinately dependent on the state of West Bengal, which oftentimes finds itself at odds with the central government in New Delhi. It’s not to suggest that Kolkata would ever seek to deliberately disrupt the rest of India’s planned overland trade with ASEAN out of malicious intent, but simply to draw attention to how it might leverage its irreplaceable transit location and consequent geostrategic significance in order to extract beneficial concessions from New Delhi. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and her All India Trinamool Congress have always been in favor of a more decentralized federal approach towards their state, and this platform has become even more attractive to their constituents in the aftermath of Prime Minister Modi’s disastrous “demonetization” decision.

In the event of widespread political and/or socio-economic unrest in the state, whether due to anti-center protests and/or Bangladesh-originating terrorist attacks, India’s access to the troubled Northeastern States might quickly and indefinitely become impeded, thus presenting a major national security risk for New Delhi. Moreover, a period of extended political uncertainty and perhaps even serious security concerns in West Bengal might serve as a deterrent to private trade, thereby tempering the high hopes that India has pinned on the Trilateral Highway and its ambitious “Act East” strategy.

New Delhi is aware of this premier geostrategic vulnerability, which is why it pursued the underwhelming Kaladan Corridor in the first place and signed an historic transshipment agreement with Bangladesh in 2015 (made possible by an equally historic and long overdue land swap deal), but both of these alternatives are of limited function and have their own practical constraints. Furthermore, it’ll still take a long time for them to enter into full use, if at all, so for the foreseeable future, West Bengal will remain New Delhi’s most dependable access route to the Northeastern States and mainland ASEAN’s marketplace. For this reason, Chief Minister Banerjee is in an enviable political position whereby she couldrealistically leverage her state’s location in order to maximize the chances that the national government will concede to her decentralization proposals.

It’s still far from certain that they she’ll be successful, and Prime Minister Modi is well-known for his stubbornness, but New Delhi certainly has very compelling reasons to seriously consider what could eventually amount to the bestowing of broad self-governing privileges to West Bengal. On the other hand, the granting of full autonomy or “identity Federalized” status to one state would inevitably catalyze a larger process of decentralization and possibly even outright devolution in some of the others, heightening the prospects that residents of the Northeastern States and Tamil Nadu would agitate for similar rights. India might not be prepared for a 21st-century version of the States Reorganization Act, no matter how belated and beneficial it could be, which is why New Delhi might stringently oppose Chief Minister Banerjee’s initiatives despise West Bengal’s crucial geostrategic role in actualizing India’s “Act East” strategy.

Nevertheless, the main point remains the same, and it’s that West Bengal is the bottleneck for India’s commercial and real-sector economic engagement with mainland ASEAN, and the state functions as the vital gateway to both the Trilateral Highway and troubled Northeastern States. India’s “Act East” strategy is naturally dependent on stability in this irreplaceable transit territory, which translates in practical terms to giving Kolkata an advantage in its political disputes with New Delhi, whereby the center feels compelled in conceding to some of the periphery’s proposals so as to safeguard the viability of this corridor. There’s a major risk, however, that if this prerogative is wielded irresponsibly by West Bengal or militantly overreacted to by the central authorities, that it could unwittingly spark the country’s political-administrative unravelling, which is why all well-intentioned actors must tread extra cautiously so as to avoid any inadvertent consequences.


Introduction
The victory of Trump in USA’s presidential election clearly vindicated the fact resentment lies inside western society against the ongoing neo-liberal globalisation order. This article points out that Alternative Right Movement is a direct result of demographic crisis and debt crisis that West is facing. We also tried to point out how West sank into twin crisis of demographic crisis and debt crisis why Silk Road 2.0 must be supported by alternative right.

Rise of West
Western civilization began its journey after Germanic tribes conquered the declining Western Roman Empire. By 500 AD Western people gradually transformed themselves into Christian feudal agrarian society from Pagan tribal hunting society. Arabian domination in Mediterranean-Iberia regions and Viking forays into Europe made Westerners inward looking with little interest in trade and commerce.

By middle of 11th century Arabs became weaker and Vikings were Christianised. Then Westerners began to show interest in international trade and expansion beyond West. The first expansion drive was Crusade Wars.

Though defeated, Westerners got the knowledge of non-West world during Crusades and worked on them. Westerners finally made breakthrough in 1490s when they were able to find sea routes skipping Muslim dominated Silk Road and reached American continent on one hand and Asian producers on the other.

By mid-16th century, Western domination of seas and international trade was complete with the aid of supreme ship-building-naval technology. This era was called mercantile capitalism. By 19th century, Westerners were dominating global production as well with the help of automated machines. We call this industrial capitalism. Capitalism brought with it demand for market, raw materials, labour and hence West created colonies across the non-West world.

Famous political scientist Angus Maddison noted that between 1000 and 1820, population grew 5-fold in the West, but less than 4-fold in the Rest. Between 1770 and 1937, Western population grew from 150 million to 750 million and 30 million Westerners migrated to Americas.

Impact of Industrial Capitalism

    The continuous profit seeking nature of industrial capitalism led to three results:

  • Economies of scale made bigger ownerships more competitive compared to the smaller ownerships and this resulted in ownership distribution of means of production highly skewed.

  • Continuous automation is done in a specific industry to reduce the demand for labour and increase profit of capital owners. This made room for class-struggle and working class emerged as most important anti-capitalist advocate.

  • More complex machines needed more educated workers to work with and so education became primary variables in determining effective workers of a society. Everyone was expected to get education since childhood. Thus cost of raising children rose dramatically.

    These three gave rise to again two outcomes:

  • Most of society’s income became concentrated among few property owners and hence growth of consumption capacity failed to match the growth of production capacity. This implied over accumulation crisis or lack of effective demand crisis.

  • Higher cost of raising children forced people to reduce birth rates. Less birth entailed further less effective demand.

Impact of Lack of Effective Demand Crisis
Demand is of two types: demand for consumer goods called consumption and demand for capital goods called investment. Now as demand crisis plagued the West, its capital started to be invested in both comparatively lesser developed Western countries and also non West colonies. Thus more West countries and even non-West Japan started getting developed.

Thus fight for market of consumer goods, capital goods and raw materials further intensified among already developed and newly developed industrialised nations. This finally led to two World Wars and a Great Depression in Western economy.

Industrial capitalism was discredited and anti-capitalist concepts like anti-colonialism, socialism and communism gained momentum throughout the world after Russian Revolution. Finally, after World-War-II, the West gradually stripped most of its colonial possessions in non-West. Socialism gained huge popularity both in the West and non-West.

Age of Socialism
Post-World-War-II years often seen as the most prosperous and optimist age in the entire world. The basis of socialism is effective demand crisis of capitalism. And so socialism advocates resource allocation not for profit maximization but for some pre-determined social goals.

West started to use state expenditure as a way to create extra demand by which lack of demand in the market will be neutralised. Non-West viewed socialism as an effective tool by which state will be used to allocate resources to modernise and industrialise its economy and society.

Working class emerged as the most important advocate of socialism and working class rights were looked after by nationalising key industries, health and education.

Women Emancipation and Sex Revolution
Another important factor during this period was “emancipation” of women. By late-19th century, Western families were already having lower birth rates. Hence, Western women got chance to go for outdoor jobs. By late-1960s, women were a formidable part of Western working class and so desires of women can no longer go unheeded. Western women use the contraceptive revolution of 1960s to reduce birth rate and spend more time in outdoor jobs. This was associated with gay rights movement. Hence 1960s saw sex revolution throughout the West.

Age of Financial Capitalism
The elite bankers and big capitalists were struggling against socialist advocacy for more state role in resource allocation. By 1970s, the Western elite class came up with financial capitalism to counter effective demand crisis. In this system, asset price will be inflated through debt channelization in asset market and profit will be sought by trading in assets. These financial profits became main source of demand and state was no longer needed to create demand.
Gradually, the West began to specialize in finance and exported its production base to the non-Western world where more profits can be made by using non-Western cheap labor. This process was termed as neo-liberal globalization.
Moreover, women’s desire for more outdoor activities was used by the Western elites to increase labor pool and destroy working class bargaining power considerably. Feminism was used as a tool by the elites to make look worker husbands as the exploiter of their home maker wives and employment giver capitalists-bankers as the liberator. But Feminism resulted in breakdown of families and less than replacement rate fertility rate among the Westerners. Consumerism became the new religion of the society.

Fall of West
Slowly non-West countries esp. China start becoming industrialized at the cost of deindustrialization of most advanced Western country USA who specializes in finance with debt provided by non-West industrializing producers. Other Western countries who fail to develop financial base face economic stagnation. In 2007-09, global financial crisis devastated the Western financial base as well. All on a sudden the West finds itself indebted to non West and its financial base is in disarray.
This economic disaster is accompanied by four decades of less than replacement rate birth rate among white Westerners. Hence West relies on migration flow from non-West world to tackle this demographic crisis among Western whites.

Rise of Alternative Right
So by 2010s, the West is plagued with economic stagnation, indebtedness, lack of desirable jobs and demographic crisis. Moreover, immigration from non-West to West and relatively higher fertility rate among non-West immigrant women compared to Western women were threatening the core of the social fabric of the Western society.
As a result of this economic agony and demographic threat, a huge section of white West finds salvation in ultra nationalism, white racism, etc. which is designated as alternative right movement. Hence, alternative right movement accuses globalization for the West’s economic woes and non-West migrants for destroying the Western society.
Point is to counter globalization their economic policies are anti profit maximization and to counter demographic threat their social values are racist, anti-feminist, anti-consumerist and pro-family. As a result, alternative rightists are coming into contradiction with banker-capitalist neo-liberal elites.

Conclusion
We like to conclude our article by pointing out that Alternative Right Movement is clearly anti Neo liberal elites. Profit motivation and love for consumerist culture led to specialization in finance which resulted in deindustrialisation and debt crisis especially in USA, Latin Europe and Greece. Demographic crisis has hit West mainly due to feminism which preached motherhood and family activities as exploitation of women. Now the West is aged society which is causing influx of immigrants. Now if Alternative Right movement attacks only immigrant policies leaving feminism-consumerism not attacked, then their movement is bound to fail. This is because feminism-consumerism is the cause of falling birth rate while immigration is the result. Attacking result without attacking the cause will never succeed. So our suggestion to our Alternative Right friends is that feminism-consumerism must be the main focus. If they are dealt with successfully, immigrant influx can be avoided as well. Moreover, their position must be pro Silk Road 2.0 which is Chinese proposal of infrastructural investments. Silk Road 2.0 of China and Eurasian Union of Russia are in fact opposition to the neo liberal order. So Alternative Right friends must cooperate with China-Russia in their fight against Neo-Liberalism.


Only 25 years have passed since the liberal ideologue Francis Fukuyama hailed the End of History, i.e., the irreversible triumph of liberalism and the unipolar supremacy of the American paradigm of globalization. Yet already today, the liberal camp and mainstream media are bemoaning the dawn of a new, anti-liberal historical era. While this revolution has been largely attributed to Trump’s election as US President and the rise of “Eurosceptic” parties in the EU, this tectonic shift has its main impetus, and future, on the Eurasian continent.

The crisis of unipolar globalization and liberalism’s supposedly unstoppable processes of individualization, massification, desacralization, rationalization, and universalization [1] is not only, or not so much due to the impasse in Washington and Brussels as it is the challenge posed to varying degrees by the emerging Eurasian alternative. The steady, albeit reactionary rise of the Eurasian Economic Union, the alternative resources being accrued by BRICS, and ambitious integration and development projects such as the Chinese-initiated One Belt One Road, and the overtures by these and analogous endeavors towards other continents, including Europe, are dialectically contributing to a new world order - a post-liberal and inevitably anti-liberal, multipolar world order. This is the fundamental trajectory of the 21st century which the liberal camp has denied and by which it is therefore increasingly being overwhelmed.

As one of the founding fathers of Eurasianism, Nikolay Trubetzkoy, presciently deciphered in 1920 [2], the liberal and Atlanticist project, by claiming for itself the mantle of “humanity” and “civilization,” existentially threatens the rest of humanity, and therefore has the potential to unite them in common opposition. This natural historical imperative is precisely what we are seeing today. A diverse number of states, cultures, and civilizations, threatened by liberal globalization which, neither created nor governed by them, has ultimately nothing to offer them but the role of “junior partners” or neo-colonialism, are being spurred to pursue joint developmental alternatives. The law of uneven and combined development typical of late capitalism on the one hand and the processes of globalization on the other are increasingly, objectively driving these countries into each other’s arms, while evermore confronting them with the dilemma of transitioning from being objects of global processes to being conscious actors recognizing the “need to formulate the geopolitical context themselves, not under its influence.”[3] Paradoxically, the unipolar nature of globalization and corresponding monopolization of the classical capitalist model of development by the West is leading them to subject, or channel the logic of capital into necessitated solidarity and multilateral projects which prioritize strategic development, mutually-beneficial terms, and cautious allowance for the preservation of sovereignty over the raw logic of the market.

In effect, the Eurasian Union, BRICS, One Belt One Road, and related initiatives are thus for now spurring a kind of counter-globalization, or multipolar realism which offers numerous more opportunities and justice than the End of History. This begs a number of theoretical questions which deserve deliberation. Are the socialist or Third Way projects of the 20th century outdated for this axis of resistance? Russian President Vladimir Putin’s commentary on the Soviet vs. Russian Federation’s contours of strategic development and the example of the Chinese model are instructive in this regard. In these examples and others, such as that of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, we can clearly see the intriguing implication that detaching from the global capitalist system would entail more hardships than are necessary for long-term just and sovereign development in the 21st century. Could the intimate intertwining of the Eurasian supercontinent through integration and infrastructural projects call into question both Karl Kautsky and Vladimir Lenin’s theories of imperialism? Will the limits of capitalist development be reached and begin to conflict these unions, i.e., will there surface objective and subjective preconditions for “imperialist” conflicts between them? This new, unique, unfolding experience demands a review of Marxian and Third Way doctrines just as the very emergence of these blocs has shaken the foundations of liberal dogma.

For now, the Eurasian alternative is still reactive. This can clearly be seen in the fate of Novorossiya, in which the vanguard, ideologically-charged elements of Eurasian integration and the revolution in Russian geopolitical consciousness were ultimately exhausted by Russia’s cautious and long-term strategy or, as some continue to argue, indecisiveness. But no one can soberly blame Russia for this just as no one can blame China for not launching a full-scale occupation of the South China Sea Islands or blame Serbia for not liberating occupied Serbian lands at the first opportunity. We are in a transition period, and transitions that are marked by too costly leaps forward always fulfill the prophecy of the original meaning of the word “revolution.” Moreover, contextualizing ourselves on the Eurasian continent, we are dealing with civilizations that are naturally conservative.

While geopolitics forms the base inertia of this resistance and alternative, it is insufficient as a mediator in itself, as the tensions between India and China, two key players on the Eurasian continent, painfully display. The main dilemma facing any qualitative advancement or legitimization of the Eurasian alternative is therefore ideological in nature. It is no coincidence that the recent global shift has been accompanied by frantic “discoveries” of ideological intuitions and anticipations of the emerging anti-liberal order. The so-called European New Right [4], Eurasianism [5], the Fourth Political Theory [6], and the caricatural “Alternative Right” are symbolic in this regard. While the latter is in no position to be compared to the former two schools, some of its marginal elements have been influenced by or caricatured the so-called European New Right. As the lack of ideological resolve or direction among the conscious actors of the Eurasian alternative begins to make itself felt amidst inertia-restricted reaction and purely technical mechanisms, the analyses, theses, proposals and growing relevance of the European New Right and Eurasianism will prove indispensable.

The European New Right, with its organic and dynamic critique of liberalism, globalization, and Modernity offers a transformed Europe that is not only open to cooperating with emerging Eurasian projects, but which seeks to altogether re-integrate Europe “back into itself” and, by extension, back into the common Eurasian supercontinent’s heritage and geopolitical potential. Eurasianism, on the other hand, with its classical birth among the interwar Russian emigres and its newest fertilization in post-Soviet soil, offers a Russia which realizes its role as a unique civilizational bridge between Europe and Asia whose raison d’etat is multipolarity. It bears crucial recognition that many scholars and analysts have attributed the contemporary Russian Federation’s leading role in resistance to Atlanticism and initiative in building Eurasian integration to precisely this school of thought’s confirmed relevance. These open schools of thought, transcending rigid political divisions into “left” and “right” and lending themselves towards metabolization by Eurasia’s many other civilizations, deserve close study and application to integration processes. Indeed, with their collaborative convergence in the form of the Fourth Political Theory, they are striving to revitalize and re-arm the very values which Eurasian counter-globalization is trying to protect and rejuvenate for future generations. Herein arises the possibility of a Silk Road connecting more than just economies.

****
[1] These are the five processes attributed to Modernity by the so-called “European New Right” in its Manifesto for a European Renaissance.

[2] See Nikolay Trubetzkoy’s Europe and Humanity (1920)

[3] Leonid Savin, “Eurasianism in the Context of the 21st Century”, <http://katehon.com/article/eurasianism-context-21st-century>

[4] See Michael O’Meara’s New Culture, New Right: Anti-Liberalism in Postmodern Europe (2004)

[5] See Alexander Dugin’s Eurasian Mission: An Introduction to Neo-Eurasianism (2014)

[6] See Alexander Dugin’s The Fourth Political Theory (2009)

As a relatively new phenomenon, the movement is quite heterogeneous, but the fact that it is a new phenomenon, makes it more interesting for all those who intend to do a research on alt - right as a political theory.
Victory of Donald Trump on Presidential elections in the United States actualize this movement as a relevant phenomenon on a political scene, which tends to be further developed in the following years.   Army of the "memes" made their first great victory: Donald Trump is the president of the United States of America.

A broad range of different people, from libertarians, to neo conservativism supporters, to far right nationalists - this could be a definition of alt – right supporters. Homogeneous range of people whose common value is the conservatism or at least nationalism. American conservatism is characterized by traditional values regarding society and liberal economy. Alt-right alternative is well known for established mainstream conservatism. Just as Tramp is an anti-establishment politician in comparison with the Republican candidates like Mr. Ted Cruz and Mr. Marc Rubio. Alternative right has its social impact transformed into political influence by the support of Donald Trump. So alt-right is closely connected to the anti-establishment politicians. To explain this connection, I have to explain the context that led to the rise of alt -right movement and its articulation during the presidential campaign.

In the political system of the United States there are two major political parties: Republican and Democratic. Political parties influence the public opinion and are shaping it, but also public opinion affects the parties, and it models their policies. A voter is influenced by both of these factors. Such a political system led to the fact that the two parties compete for a vote of an average voter. This consequently implies that these two parties begin to resemble one to another. In fact, on the ideological scale, Democrats and Republicans are gradually becoming closer to the political center. Candidates, campaigns, platforms, greatly resemble to each other, which brought the routinization and fossilization of the electoral process in the country. On the other hand politicians became the mere representatives of the big business sphere and their political decisions are not related any more to the interests and perceptions of the average "little man". Furthermore, people have lived in the belief that ideology does not exist and that we have reached the end of history in that sense. The front characteristic of this post-modern time is a constellation of factors which is actually a package that contains: multiculturalism, political correctness, post material values ​​... etc. These “post-materialist” values ​​are a means of an attempt to replace morality and ethics in society, and in the same time, it is a way to divert attention from the real problem of growing social inequality, as a consequence of linear growth of capital and profits. These values ​​do not have much in common with the experience and perspective of the average American man in his forties - the average voter. The truth is that the US is in crisis, all Mid West is chain of roast. Alienation from the political center and the phenomenon of the established politicians who tend to form their "dynasty" with the coming crisis is a good soil for the anti-establishment politicians and alt-right movement, itself.

We can say that the alt – right in USA does not have any direct connection with tradition, any kind of ideology, historical event or even a myth. There is no alt – right party or alt right manifesto, or alt – right school of philosophy. Alt - right is a mere reaction… A reaction which is based on criticism about many elements of the mainstream society

Surely the biggest challenge for alt-right is the way of communication with their potential supporters. The alt – right has emerged and has grown on internet. The most important precondition for the operational and methodological articulation of this movement is the fact that the mainstream media support the mainstream political candidates who try to preserve the status-quo situation in society. Due to this setting, the alt – right had to be innovative and find out and elaborate the alternative methodology. It used the already existing social media on internet, but further developed a completely new way of political marketing, especially on Facebook. In a very short time, we witnessed the establishment of a completely new code for spreading informations, new use of FB pages, FB groups, internet pages and websites. They all supported Mr. Donald Trump, and were critical, often ironic about the mainstream values and “political correctness” (use of Pepe the frog memes, etc…).

Interesting fact: Alt – right is movement that is settled on Facebook social network, in the other side Twitter banned several alt – right figures. I can conclude that facebook is blue collar social network, which is used by average American. Twitter is mainly considered as the media for “intellectuals”, and for “students from Berkley”… For sure, the message which  is settled on face book becomes more visible and more public…
In Europe we might have the potential increase of Alt - right movement in the next few years. The indicator which can be used for long-term forecasts are the results of elections for the European Parliament. These elections have shown that the Eurosceptic right has an important growing potential. This segment of right is trying to preserve the identity and culture of a nation, it opposes further integration in the EU, advocating a Europe of nations, and is considered to be the main bearer of the sovereignty of the nation. The explanation that the rise of right-wing is  caused by the global economic crisis and generally making any parallels with the global economic crisis and “rising fascism” are in the final analysis, incorrect. Austria in recent years recorded an important economic growth, and despite this fact there is a linear rise of right-wing. In this context, it is important to stress that Austria is facing a large increase of Muslim migrants. The authentic desire to preserve the identity of European peoples in turbulent but also in not so turbulent years is the element which generates a force on the right. Also, in the case of France, the 2014 local elections, the National Front won a quarter of the votes, which is a major increase in popularity of one movement of far right. From 2014 to 2017 increased the number of the terrorist attacks, but also an increase in violence caused by newly arrived immigrants, which accumulated the discontent among the French. In this moment, presidential elections are very soon, Mrs Marin le Pen might be at least one of the potential winners in these elections. Also, "left government", and President Francois Hollande  have made great concessions in relation to the requirements of economic liberalism and the demands of other "European partners".. Situation in France is very similar with situation in the United States of America: there is an anti-establishment candidate: Mrs, Marin le Pen, and in the same time - two very similar parties with same politics, and very large number of citizens who are disappointed. Second great battlefield of the “meme wars” will probably be set on the French soil – the presidential elections in March this year.

To conclude, yes, alt - right movement has made its first victory in United States, but we can be sure that alt – right methodology has a very big potential in next few years, mainly in the periods of elections (In France for example) Also, the values of alt – right movement will not be the same in Europe like it was in USA, mainly because in Europe exist the historically established and organic connections with tradition, but also, traditionalism with its many sub-divisions as a school of thought. Contrary to this – the USA phenomena like the neocon – right, and alt – right in the present time are mainly reactions.